Capitalism And Socialism: Case Study: Uber

Week 2 – Discussion

57 57 unread replies. 109 109 replies.

Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Refer to the Discussion Forum Grading Rubric under the Settings icon above for guidance on how your discussion will be evaluated.

 

Capitalism   and Socialism: Case Study: Uber

This discussion assignment   requires you to submit at least four posts: an initial post, two reply   posts to fellow students in threads other than your own, and a revised post.

 

Prepare: Your initial post in this discussion must be informed by   the required material for this discussion. The required material for this   discussion will introduce you to what is new about Uber as a business model,   the profit incentive in business, and how laws can make or break innovation   in business. Your preparation should focus on the characteristics of   capitalism and socialism, as well as other business concepts presented in the   required material. Since your initial post in this discussion will examine   the relation between running a business such as Uber and the laws and   economic system of the nation(s) in which it operates, make sure to comb the   material on Uber for laws, regulations, and the economic setting that affect   its operations. You are encouraged to research relevant laws and regulations   to make sure that you have current information. You will also need to review   the material on the three ethical theories employed in the Week One   Discussion as you will draw from that material for this week’s discussion   too.

 

Reflect: Keep in mind that Uber has presented itself into the   market not as a transportation service but as a service that pairs consumers   with ride sharing services by means of a unique phone app. But some   sources—including the taxi industry and one California court finding (details   in the required material), as well as the characterization of Uber presented   in Section 3.4 of the textbook—seem to challenge this branding. According to   these sources, Uber is avoiding laws that apply to the transportation   industry and, thereby, usurping a rightful place that the taxi industry has   carved for itself. Consumers, on the other hand, have shown their preference   for Uber by a high demand for its services in the USA and abroad, including   those countries in which Uber has been banned. Compared to taxis, Uber offers   consumers an efficient system for procuring a ride even in remote areas where   taxis do not frequent, a convenient payment method (no need for cash, and   fares can be split among different users on the same ride), and significantly   cheaper fares compared to taxis. In many instances, Uber cars come equipped   with water, candy, and magazines, all for free. Uber drivers are also better   off because they keep the majority of the fares for the rides that they   service, which is exactly the opposite case of taxi drivers, and they can   choose when they want to work. Clearly, this is a controversial case and thus   very apt for the examination for this discussion.

Keep in mind that a nation’s   economic system is shaped by the laws that are in place. Accordingly, laws   (including state regulations and local ordinances) will give you a clue for   the kind of economic system that exists. Keep in mind also that most nations   have mixed economies and there is probably no economic system that purely   represents socialism or capitalism. So you will find a different combination   of both socialism and capitalism in any nation that you are examining.

 

Write: You have four tasks for your initial post. In order to   present an organized post, address each one of these tasks in a separate   paragraph and in the following order. Your first task is to articulate the   economic system (or combination of characteristics of both socialism and   capitalism) that such laws depict. Your second task is to examine the laws   that either support or limit the operations by Uber. Your third task is to   analyze how your findings from your first and second tasks affect Uber. And   your fourth task is to present your moral position with regard to Uber. For   this latter task, you will need to identify one of the three ethical theories   covered in the Week One (utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics) as   support for the moral position that you are taking. For example, you may hold   the moral position that Uber is morally justifiable because it provides a   good for consumers that fills in a gap that had not been met by the taxi   industry. Or you may take the position that Uber’s positioning in the market   is morally wrong.

 

Revise: Read the feedback provided by your professor to your   initial post, either directly to you or to your fellow students. Use this as   an opportunity to learn from your professor, especially with regard to the   best ways to apply the course material and your research to your analysis. On   the basis of what you have learned in this process, post an improved revision   of your initial post that applies the additional knowledge that you have   gained.

Remember that your grade depends   on the quality of your initial and revised responses, not just on the   submission of an attempt at improvement. It is thus to your advantage to post   the best initial post you can and then to also improve that best effort as   much as you can through revision. Taking this process seriously will help you   develop the skills you need to do well on the Final Project.

 

Requirements for Your Initial Post:

• Your initial post should be at least 400 words in        length and have citations and references in APA notation. It should        address the prompt in its entirety. This means that you should not split        your response to the prompt in multiple posts. Your examination should        be both thorough and succinct. This is a combination that demands time        and thought, so give yourself sufficient time to draft and revise.
• Please be advised that until you post, you will not        see what your fellow students are posting. Once you submit your post,        you will be able to view the posts from your other classmates. You can        then proceed to reply to at least two different threads based on the        required material for this discussion.
• Your list of references for your initial post should        include the video and the other required material for this discussion,        including Section 1.3 of the textbook on Starbucks, as well as the        Instructor Guidance and any other announcements presented to you by your        professor. Use all of the material presented to you in the course and by        your professor, in addition to any other sources that you consulted to        inform yourself about the case (but not Wikipedia or similar sources).
• Your research should seek scholarly articles or        articles that offer factual or otherwise verifiable information. Your        initial post for this discussion should be submitted no later than        the end of Thursday (11:59 pm, U.S. Mountain time).

 

Requirements for Replies to Other   Threads:

• At least two of the four posts required should be in        the form of replies to fellow classmates in threads other than your own.
• Each of your replies should be at least 200 words, and        informed by the course material.        As such, the replies must have citations and references in APA notation.        Your list of references for each reply should include all of the course        material that has informed your reply, in addition to any research that        you have obtained on your own.
• Your replies should focus on the specific examination        presented by your fellow students. Address (a) the characteristics of        the relevant economic system as presented by your fellow student, (b)        the analysis of how laws and/or the economic system affect Uber, as        presented by your fellow student, or (c) the moral judgment        presented by your fellow student. For any of these choices, you should        examine whether the examination or analysis was carried out accurately        and successfully. You are encouraged to disagree and challenge what was        presented by your fellow student. This does not constitute an attack on        your fellow student but an attempt to arrive at a better understanding        and application of the material. But you need to provide reasons and        support for your disagreement or challenge and propose a more accurate        or defensible alternative.
• As mentioned in the Week One discussion, keep in mind        that although the notion of the moral good will vary among ethical        theories, they often produce the same or similar results. So make sure        to distinguish (a) the intent and (b) the consequences of the action        under examination.

 

Requirements for Revising   Your Initial Post:

• Submit a revision of your initial post by either        replying to your own post or to the feedback provided to you by your        professor.
• There is no minimum word requirement for your revised        initial post. But you should always explain the reasons for revising        your post so that it is clear what you are doing. If you are revising        only a few words, or an application of an ethical theory, you should        avoid submitting a post with vague language such as: “duty ethics works        better here” or “I did not consider the economic system.” It is        important to recognize that no one can read your mind so you need to        provide the setting for your revision (Why? What prompted it? What        course material informed you?), and it is important to write in clear        language and complete sentences.
• Your revised initial post is your chance to correct        any oversights or errors in your initial post, or to show your improved        understanding of the material and its applications to the case at hand.        You may, for example, come to the realization that another ethical        theory is better than the one that you initially employed to support your        position. Accordingly, your revision should indicate that you chose        another ethical theory and an explanation why you find the replacement        more suitable. Or, you might have realized that your conclusion did not        take into account important factors necessary for your evaluation of the        situation.
• You should maximize the improvement of your initial        post by employing your professor’s feedback as a guide. Keep in mind that you may not always receive direct        feedback from your professor. But your professor will have submitted        feedback in the discussion to other posts. So read your professor’s        feedback whether it is addressed to you directly or to other fellow        students. This will give you much to think about and apply to your own        post.
• If your professor or a fellow classmate responds to        your revised initial post, and on this basis, you find good reason to        submit yet another revision, then by all means do so. The more you        improve your initial post, the more you will benefit both in terms of        your learning and most likely your grade.